On 02/09/2016 10:19 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
Updated version below:
---
From d63251560cf2670badbc86c83502502f29c087e0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Christoph Hellwig
Date: Tue, 9 Feb 2016 18:11:32 +0100
Subject: nvme: fix Kconfig description for BLK_DEV_NVME_SCSI
Signed-off-by: Christoph
Updated version below:
---
>From d63251560cf2670badbc86c83502502f29c087e0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Christoph Hellwig
Date: Tue, 9 Feb 2016 18:11:32 +0100
Subject: nvme: fix Kconfig description for BLK_DEV_NVME_SCSI
Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig
---
drivers/nvme/host/Kconfig | 5 +++--
On 02/09/2016 10:12 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
Does this looks reasonable?
---
From 7843fae979df3fc14007735f54cc6bb2f6f66dc5 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Christoph Hellwig
Date: Tue, 9 Feb 2016 18:11:32 +0100
Subject: nvme: fix Kconfig description for BLK_DEV_NVME_SCSI
Signed-off-by: Chri
Does this looks reasonable?
---
>From 7843fae979df3fc14007735f54cc6bb2f6f66dc5 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Christoph Hellwig
Date: Tue, 9 Feb 2016 18:11:32 +0100
Subject: nvme: fix Kconfig description for BLK_DEV_NVME_SCSI
Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig
---
drivers/nvme/host/Kconfig | 4 +
On Tue, 2016-02-09 at 13:50 +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> Jens,
>
> do you want a 'default y' patch or just a better description? I'd be
> happy to send either one.
Since it only appears to be SUSE and they've now been told, better
description is fine.
James
On Feb 9, 2016, at 5:50 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>
> Jens,
>
> do you want a 'default y' patch or just a better description? I'd be
> happy to send either one.
A better description
--
Jens Axboe
Jens,
do you want a 'default y' patch or just a better description? I'd be
happy to send either one.
On Mon, Feb 08, 2016 at 04:19:13PM +0100, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
> Ok, so what about having a 'wwid' attribute which provides combined
> information (like scsi has)?
That looks like the sensible thing to do. Thanks for pointer.
Going forward, I will solicite more feedback from scsi developers
so
On Mon, 2016-02-08 at 08:32 +0100, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
> On 02/08/2016 12:07 AM, James Bottomley wrote:
> > On Sun, 2016-02-07 at 15:28 -0700, Jens Axboe wrote:
> > > On 02/07/2016 09:04 AM, James Bottomley wrote:
> > > > On Sun, 2016-02-07 at 10:22 +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > > > > Keit
On 02/08/2016 04:12 PM, Keith Busch wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 08, 2016 at 11:13:50AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>> On Mon, Feb 08, 2016 at 12:01:16PM +0200, Sagi Grimberg wrote:
>>>
Do we have defined sysfs attributes for NVMe devices nowadays?
>>>
>>> /sys/block/nvme0n1/uuid
>>
>> That's only
On Mon, Feb 08, 2016 at 11:13:50AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 08, 2016 at 12:01:16PM +0200, Sagi Grimberg wrote:
> >
> >> Do we have defined sysfs attributes for NVMe devices nowadays?
> >
> > /sys/block/nvme0n1/uuid
>
> That's only supported for NVMe 1.1 and higher devices, and
On Mon, Feb 08, 2016 at 12:01:16PM +0200, Sagi Grimberg wrote:
>
>> Do we have defined sysfs attributes for NVMe devices nowadays?
>
> /sys/block/nvme0n1/uuid
That's only supported for NVMe 1.1 and higher devices, and optional.
For older or stupid devices we need to support the algorithm based
on
Do we have defined sysfs attributes for NVMe devices nowadays?
/sys/block/nvme0n1/uuid
If so I'd be willing to create/send some sysfs rules for them.
That'd be great!
On 02/08/2016 12:07 AM, James Bottomley wrote:
> On Sun, 2016-02-07 at 15:28 -0700, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> On 02/07/2016 09:04 AM, James Bottomley wrote:
>>> On Sun, 2016-02-07 at 10:22 +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
Keith said it should be on by default, and I promised him to
change
On 02/07/2016 05:04 PM, James Bottomley wrote:
> On Sun, 2016-02-07 at 10:22 +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>> Keith said it should be on by default, and I promised him to change
>> it once we run into problems, which I guess this counts as.
>>
>> But just curious: what distro are you using? Ups
On Sun, Feb 07, 2016 at 03:07:21PM -0800, James Bottomley wrote:
> > I run root-on-nvme on my laptop, and I haven't observed any problems.
>
> Me too apparently. It looks like this problem may be SUSE specific
> unless another distro has enabled this. I can see why they would: you
> do need pers
On Sun, 2016-02-07 at 15:28 -0700, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 02/07/2016 09:04 AM, James Bottomley wrote:
> > On Sun, 2016-02-07 at 10:22 +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > > Keith said it should be on by default, and I promised him to
> > > change
> > > it once we run into problems, which I guess thi
On 02/07/2016 09:04 AM, James Bottomley wrote:
On Sun, 2016-02-07 at 10:22 +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
Keith said it should be on by default, and I promised him to change
it once we run into problems, which I guess this counts as.
But just curious: what distro are you using? Upstream syst
On Sun, 2016-02-07 at 10:22 +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> Keith said it should be on by default, and I promised him to change
> it once we run into problems, which I guess this counts as.
>
> But just curious: what distro are you using? Upstream systemd
> explicitly rejected using scsi_id fo
Keith said it should be on by default, and I promised him to change
it once we run into problems, which I guess this counts as.
But just curious: what distro are you using? Upstream systemd
explicitly rejected using scsi_id for NVMe here:
https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/1453
The reason is fairly obvious: the default for the new option
BLK_DEV_NVME_SCSI is N and all the distribution kernels (and me when
testing) take the default options (I checked in the OBS kernel builds
and this is true).
The net result is that scsi_id from udev no longer works on nvme disks
and tha
21 matches
Mail list logo
